Yes. Usually our ranger uses it after even damage is announced, because we roll attack and damage at the same time (i.e. put all the dice in the dice cup). No problem at all.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Declaring Immediate Interrupts
- Thread starter Max1mus
- Start date
Yes. Usually our ranger uses it after even damage is announced, because we roll attack and damage at the same time (i.e. put all the dice in the dice cup). No problem at all.
LightPhoenix
First Post
I think the mistake here is in the way the DM is checking if there was a hit.
Rather than asking "Does an 18 hit your AC", my DM would ask "What is your AC?" The subtle difference here is that it gives a player a chance to jump in before a hit is calculated, allowing both the PC and DM to set a pace for the battle. Even if the DM had already announced a hit, the PC doesn't generally know by how much the hit happened. That make it harder to meta-game the power if the trigger is "on attack" and he had already rolled. Finally, it makes retroactively changing the result easier and less painful, since it's less resolved.
As an aside, I don't have a problem with the PC seeing the roll. It adds some tactical value to using Immediate Interrupts, depending on the effect. I'm most familiar with Shield, and the roll adds a certain amount of decision-making. On a 19, chances are I'll have to take the hit; on a 12 it's a little more of a gamble, and on a 2... well, if I'm getting hit on a 2, I may be screwed anyway.
Rather than asking "Does an 18 hit your AC", my DM would ask "What is your AC?" The subtle difference here is that it gives a player a chance to jump in before a hit is calculated, allowing both the PC and DM to set a pace for the battle. Even if the DM had already announced a hit, the PC doesn't generally know by how much the hit happened. That make it harder to meta-game the power if the trigger is "on attack" and he had already rolled. Finally, it makes retroactively changing the result easier and less painful, since it's less resolved.
As an aside, I don't have a problem with the PC seeing the roll. It adds some tactical value to using Immediate Interrupts, depending on the effect. I'm most familiar with Shield, and the roll adds a certain amount of decision-making. On a 19, chances are I'll have to take the hit; on a 12 it's a little more of a gamble, and on a 2... well, if I'm getting hit on a 2, I may be screwed anyway.
The problem here, as I see it is the DM being a little over zealous in his efficiency of action. (obviously a case of ZOMBIE SMASH Syndrome).
Seeing as the DM knows that there is a potential interrupt (encounter) power out there he should not try and do everything at the same time, and show a little more consideration to his players.
It doesn't really slow the game down (and is general good practice) to:
1: declare attack clearly
2: make attack roll and determine hit/miss
3: determine damage
This is three clear steps in resolution, and the player who has the interrupt should be alert enough to speak up. In this case when the attack is declared.
In my group I have a ranger that has a reaction to shift away when a creature moves adjacent. As I know this whenever I move a creature adjacent to him I look at him and say "reaction?" he says yes or no and I continue. It really doesn't slow the game down because we are both used to it.
All it takes is a little consideration, co-operation and common sense.
Seeing as the DM knows that there is a potential interrupt (encounter) power out there he should not try and do everything at the same time, and show a little more consideration to his players.
It doesn't really slow the game down (and is general good practice) to:
1: declare attack clearly
2: make attack roll and determine hit/miss
3: determine damage
This is three clear steps in resolution, and the player who has the interrupt should be alert enough to speak up. In this case when the attack is declared.
In my group I have a ranger that has a reaction to shift away when a creature moves adjacent. As I know this whenever I move a creature adjacent to him I look at him and say "reaction?" he says yes or no and I continue. It really doesn't slow the game down because we are both used to it.
All it takes is a little consideration, co-operation and common sense.
eamon
Explorer
In the past, clarifications from WotC have tended to suggest that the player may know the details of the incoming attack in these cases. See not only the shield power, but for instance also the staff-of-defense class feature; that's an immediate interrupt vs. an attack which you explicitly get to declare after the damage total is known(!).
If you needed to declare before knowing the attack roll, some powers would be almost useless; for instance the 2nd level Fighter power "No Opening" (which, given it uses the same action as CC, is probably not a good power anyhow, but at least it's conceivable if you can use it after knowing the attack roll).
They rules don't say what's the intended usage is. I strongly suspect RAI is that the player (or DM, as may be) may declare interrupts after the attack roll.
I've sent a question to CS about this, referring to the fact that some powers trigger explicitly of hits/misses. Let's see what they think.
If you needed to declare before knowing the attack roll, some powers would be almost useless; for instance the 2nd level Fighter power "No Opening" (which, given it uses the same action as CC, is probably not a good power anyhow, but at least it's conceivable if you can use it after knowing the attack roll).
They rules don't say what's the intended usage is. I strongly suspect RAI is that the player (or DM, as may be) may declare interrupts after the attack roll.
I've sent a question to CS about this, referring to the fact that some powers trigger explicitly of hits/misses. Let's see what they think.
I talked it over with the player in question and as long as I declare the special actions, like Zombie Smash, he was ok with having to declare Disruptive Strike before I announce the result of the attack. He might miss some ideal opportunities to use the action, but most of the time he will get it right.
He said that it of course makes Disruptive Strike less powerful, but at the same time, he gets a total of 3d10+21+1d8 damage* the round he uses Disruptive Strike if you are comparing damage vs other Encounter powers at level 3. Even without any rider effects, it is the most damaging power at it's level.
*With a level 8 Ranger using Twin Strike with his standard action. The immediate action is basically a free action since he rarily uses it.
CapnZapp
Legend
I specifically mean powers that require a new decision point to be added to game where there was none before.
Let's assume it is reasonable to say you won't be using Disruptive Strike more than 5% of the time.
Then it is (to me) wholly unreasonable to add a mechanism that in 95% of the time just forces the DM to spell out each step of every monster attack with no payoff.
I am specifically arguing these kinds of powers should not have been added to the game. They are so few it would be reasonable to implement their effects through far less invasive mechanisms.
Combat Challenge does not count, because 1) it's a defining feature of the Fighter class, 2) it's reasonable to expect it to be used almost every round 3) there is some measure of predictability (in that you can expect it to be used often, and sometimes you can even predict which specific monster it's going to be used against), and 4) there is a battle-wide impact, not internal to a single character.
A power like Disruptive Strike, on the other hand, only affects the one character having the power. It's "invisible". It won't get used often, and never in the case of a miss.
There simply is something fundamentally wrong with its design. It would have been so much simpler if it was balanced on the assumption it was always effective.
And besides, using it with no effect sucks beyond belief. Why create a decision point with the assumption information is withheld when that assumption just drags down game speed? And why create a decision point when you -almost by definition- have insufficient data to do more than guess, and why then penalize that guess-work by making the power fizzle in the most unfun way?
Contrast to an immediate interrupt that allowed you to make a save to evade an incoming hit (=attack-that-connected).
This variant would not involve guess-work. It would not slow down gameplay, because nothing would be ruined by the DM accidentaly or not revealing the to hit values. It would not discourage the DM from smoothing gameplay by revealing to hit figures when that makes things simpler.
Cheers,
Zapp
UngeheuerLich
Legend
Actually, as a DM you should know your PC´s AC.
And if not, you should ask for the AC an describe your attack with words like: "This strike barely hits you" or this attack "A very precise attack which hits you with full force" or an "unaimed but very hard blow" to give hints.
with disruptive strike however i would say the ranger has to annunce it when the DM declares the attack. And if the player doesn´t make his decision fast enough, his character also doesn´t.
Prestidigitalis
First Post
Indeed, the DM should know the PC's standard AC. But with power bonuses, Second Wind, Total Defense, and feats (e.g., Shield the Fallen, Sideways Defense), AC will often deviate from that standard value. As such, I almost feel like the DM should let the player track AC and inquire at the time of the attack, every time. Otherwise, the DM will forget about the adjustments and the feats will become useless in actual play.
This is my biggest problem with 4e -- so many things to track, it's too much for mortal brains.
Prestidigitalis
First Post
Cap'n Zapp: Thanks for the clarification. Your position is reasonable, though I can imagine other solutions as well.
Ryujin
Legend
Given even the small number of things that I can do in order to change my defences (power use, Weapon of Summer, Shadow Walk), my DM has to ask from round to round. In a tight situation I might manage defences that are 6 or more points higher vs. specific attacks. This tends not to be the case for the rest of the party, but he takes the time to ask anyway. For this reason interrupts are not an issue in our group.
Similar Threads
